Exercise Physiology Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, California State University, Fullerton, California, USA.
J Strength Cond Res. 2010 Mar;24(3):779-84. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181cc2237.
The bench press exercise exists in multiple forms including the machine and free weight bench press. It is not clear though how each mode differs in its effect on muscle activation. The purpose of this study was to compare muscle activation of the anterior deltoid, medial deltoid, and pectoralis major during a Smith machine and free weight bench press at lower (70% 1 repetition maximum [1RM]) and higher (90% 1RM) intensities. Normalized electromyography amplitude values were used during the concentric phase of the bench press to compare muscle activity between a free weight and Smith machine bench press. Participants were classified as either experienced or inexperienced bench pressers. Two testing sessions were used, each of which entailed either all free weight or all Smith machine testing. In each testing session, each participant's 1RM was established followed by 2 repetitions at 70% of 1RM and 2 repetitions at 90% of 1RM. Results indicated greater activation of the medial deltoid on the free weight bench press than on the Smith machine bench press. Also, there was greater muscle activation at the 90% 1RM load than at the 70% 1RM load. The results of this study suggest that strength coaches should consider choosing the free weight bench press over the Smith machine bench press because of its potential for greater upper-body muscular development.
卧推练习有多种形式,包括器械卧推和自由重量卧推。然而,目前还不清楚每种模式在肌肉激活方面有何不同。本研究的目的是比较史密斯机和自由重量卧推在下(70% 1 次最大重复次数 [1RM])和上(90% 1RM)强度时对三角肌前束、三角肌中束和胸大肌的肌肉激活的影响。在卧推的向心阶段使用归一化肌电图幅度值来比较自由重量和史密斯机卧推之间的肌肉活动。参与者被分为有经验和无经验的卧推者。使用了两个测试阶段,每个阶段都包括全部使用自由重量或全部使用史密斯机进行测试。在每个测试阶段中,确定每个参与者的 1RM,然后进行 2 次 70% 1RM 的重复和 2 次 90% 1RM 的重复。结果表明,自由重量卧推时三角肌中束的激活程度高于史密斯机卧推。此外,在 90% 1RM 负荷下的肌肉激活程度高于在 70% 1RM 负荷下的肌肉激活程度。本研究的结果表明,力量教练应该考虑选择自由重量卧推而不是史密斯机卧推,因为它可能更有助于发展上半身的肌肉。